SB Nation User Blog: ChrisB803

Does Comcast really WANT to make money?

ChrisB803 — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:15:15 -0000

I know it's now verboten to speak of illegal streaming of games here, and I hope this post doesn't violate that policy. However, a recent development caught my eye, and it got me thinking: Why is Comcast so opposed to cashing in on the Blazers' success? Read past the jump for my advice to Comcast. Heck, I'm even giving it for FREE, so I'm making them money right away!

Without divulging my means of coming by this knowledge, I know of a certain video streamer, using a certain video streaming service, who, in just a few weeks, managed to pull in over $1,000 in donations just so people could get a password to see the game. A password that usually showed up here (until it was forbidden) within a few minutes. So, if you could get in for free, why pay? Apparently for guaranteed re-entry when the stream was inevitably pulled by The Man, otherwise known as Comcast the Copyright Holder.

So if a fly-by-night operation, using a free online service to stream the game (and reportedly in much better quality and reliability than the Blazers themselves have been able to do) could pull in heavy cash in suggested donations, why is Comcast so blind to this untapped revenue stream?

It's endemic of the old guard of media these days, it seems, to completely lambaste the piracy of copyrighted material, while doing nothing to take the temptation away.

Earth to Comcast: The Blazers' fanbase is RABID. They would pay dearly for the chance to watch their team on a nightly basis. Globally, not just in the local broadcast area. I bet they'd buy online broadcast packages instead of going to an illegal website just for a chance to catch some of the game. I bet they'd even pay a few bucks per contest, or they'd buy package deals, or... I don't know, a whole freakin' season!

I'm not hip to the legal ramifications, and it could be some NBA rule keeping this from happening, but as far as I know even NBA.com's streaming broadband games are blocked out in the team's local area, so I'm pretty sure Comcast is the one in the way, not the other way around.

If you can't get the Satellite companies to see it your way, why not go around them? You still make the money, Blazer fans perhaps don't hate you quite so vehemently, and you look like you actually care about the teams you cover, as opposed to coming off as a big corporate giant, too concerned with your subscriber numbers to realize the bottom line is passing you by.

Just my two-cents worth. Or my $3.99/game worth. Whichever you prefer, Comcast.

Of Blazers & Bunsen Burners

ChrisB803 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:54:08 -0000

After reading through Dave's most recent post and a number of responses to it, I got to thinking about a couple of things: The first being the free agents and trade options now rumored to be available, and the second being who is already on the team and their perceived value vs. their apparent NBA value. Obviously as fans, the players currently on the team are generally going to be over-valued, but is that only in the sense of their value to other teams around the NBA?

For nearly a decade here in Portland we watched as one talented team after another fell short, until the organization finally imploded into five years of downright crap. Egos, anger, drug addictions, you name it and the players had it. New management set about correcting the problem with a pledge which, however we derided it, has slowly come to pass. The team is now filled with players who are not only talented and committed, but nearly from top to bottom are just good guys who really care about each other. This team is, in large part, growing up together, learning the game and shocking the league for the past two years. Who can possibly estimate the value of a chemistry like that?

If you've ever played basketball in a league, you know it's the team that has been together the longest that often has the best chance of winning, often toppling teams who apparently are much more athletically gifted. Their familiarity with each other, and ability to push each other, comes through as an incredibly valuable commodity.

I'd say from what I've read on here the opinions are split about equally here between keeping the team pretty much intact, at least as we start next season, and making a splash in trades or free agency. The argument for the former generally centers around allowing the talent of our players to develop, while the latter says we need more consistent production, and veteran savvy to help us through the rigours of an NBA season, especially the playoffs.

I'm not knocking either of those views, but I wonder whether the veteran savvy of one or two additional players can overcome the familiarity our players are building together.

You can debate endlessly about what the team should do, and I don't think there is a question that the team will (and should) do something, but I believe Portland currently possess something potentially far more valuable than a big-name free agent (if you ever could have called Hedo Turkoglu that); they have a team chemistry that, by most accounts, supersedes that seen in nearly any other team in the NBA. Can the monetary or talent value of such a thing truly be counted?

What are your thoughts? Can Portland continue to advance on the backs of the talent improvement of their existing core and the chemistry and family atmosphere of the surrounding players? Is talent or 'fit' more important in bringing in new players, or trading existing players? If you assume that chemistry is more valuable than the talents of a player like Turkoglu, then how do you fill the existing holes and keep the chemistry intact?

Your Locker Room Speech

ChrisB803 — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:18:12 -0000

It is Tuesday night, 6:30pm, and the Portland Trailblazers have assembled in the locker room. White jerseys with scarlet and black trim drape over massive frames, covering beating hearts and clenched muscles. The tension runs high as these boys-come-men struggle to forget possibly the worst defeat of their lives.

You are Coach Nate McMillan. Veteran of many NBA years and plenty of playoff games. You're standing at the center of this room, watching your players go through their pregame rituals like they have all year, but you know something is different. Slowly every eye turns to you. From the comparatively veteran Joel Pryzbilla to the deer-in-the-headlights rookie Nicolas Batum, they are waiting to hear what you have to say.

This is your moment. Put your words in the mind and mouth of Nate McMillan. What do you say to this team to help ease their fears and send them onto the court like a roaring lion, instead of a whimpering house cat?

I'll post my speech as the first comment below.

Rudy = ?

ChrisB803 — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 19:46:27 -0000

It's not a math question, so stick around a moment.

Before I get to the (non-math) question hidden in this post, I had a quick observation about Rudy I haven't heard mentioned on here yet (although I'll admit I haven't read EVERY comment, like Mortimer or Tom5-oh): The fate that has befallen Sergio will not be repeated by Rudy.

I've heard some comments on here that question whether Rudy may fold if he doesn't get a ton of minutes right away. First of all, I don't think Sergio has folded, despite his struggles, so the point might be mute (moot). However, I think Rudy will work harder to adapt to the American style of basketball because of what he's given up. The money he's leaving behind in Europe to come play for us; the four-year deal he'll likely be signing, with the final two years being a team option; all of that means Rudy has more incentive than his Spanish point guard friend. I believe we will see more out of Sergio next year, assuming he's still here, but only because I think Sergio now has a better idea of what he needs to work on. I think Rudy knows he has four years of hard work to earn his really big payday. No doubt he'll be tempted sometimes to hang it up and go make a lot of money back home, but his decision to come over here shows that Rudy is not just a C-T-C player.

Now, on to my question: Which current NBA player do you think Rudy has the best chance to resembling? Granted our knowledge of Rudy is limited, but use a current player to give an example of what Rudy will be when he's adjusted to the NBA style.

My answer: Ray Allen. Allen has always been a deceptively clever player. Your initial impression is that he must simply be a shooter with little else to offer, but then he jukes you out of your shoes and drives by for the floating jumper or a nifty lay-up. He's thin, so you think he must be weak, but his length and quickness make up for some of his lacking muscle. Still, all of those other skills are set up by the fact that he's a deadly outside shooter who must be respected. He might drop 30 on you one night, then only rack up 10 the next, but you better never forget he's on the court or he's going to burn you.

OK, your turn.

Make Your Case

ChrisB803 — Tue, 20 May 2008 14:27:50 -0000

For the sake of discussion, let's pretend for a moment that I'm the General Manager from another team... And let's pretend I'm not Isiah Thomas stupid. Here's your chance to argue why I should consider one of your players for a trade.

We've already gone over a number of trade scenarios, so I'm not looking for specific trades. What I want is to know why you think a particular player is worth my time to consider. What talents do they possess to spark my imagination? Even more importantly, what talents do they NOT have that makes you so eager to get me to look at them?

If you've ever purchased a used car, one of the first things through your mind is, "why is this guy getting rid of this?". I think that would be a fair question for any GM looking to trade a player. Is he just looking to get rid of someone who doesn't quite fit his plans, or is this player a lost cause he's looking to dump on someone else?

So here you go: Sell me on the player of your choice. Jarrett Jack isn't working out for you; why would he do better for me? Channing Frye is a buffet of goodness; why are you so hungry to dump him? Martell Webster is a sharpshooter just waiting to break out; why do you need to take a break from him?

Trade Outlaw

ChrisB803 — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:50:47 -0000

I'm not flaming or looking for outraged remarks, hear me out:

Having read blzrfan's excellent recap of last night's game, and our lack of offensive variety and defensive accumen, it got me thinking. Everyone says what we need is a better defensive point guard who can still shoot pretty well, get to the rim and distribute the rock from time to time. We're fine with the offense running through Roy a good percentage of the time, and I think most everyone is pretty satisfied with the play of Steve Blake (but he'd be more useful in the second unit as a stabilizing influence). The general consensus at the moment seems to be that Jack should be traded in the off-season, while he still has that 'upside' that gives him even marginal trade value. Much longer of what he's doing now and we're likely to get next to nothing out of him.

Not to be too harsh on Jarrett, but... let's be realistic, the guy has been a disaster at PG. He might be better off going somewhere that can play him as a small shooting guard, or who doesn't need... you know... defense, or shooting ability, or...

However, Jack alone will not be near enough to land us that PG we NEED, of course, which means other assets need to be included. Maybe one of those is a first or second-round draft pick or two, but the odds are a higher-echelon player is going to need to be sent packing to get that PG-of-the-future we're all drooling over. Perhaps a Jose Calderon or something similar.

Among our tradeable assets, only Outlaw has lived up to his contract, and probably has a higher trade value at the moment than his skill-set deserves. Blasphemy? Perhaps. But in my admittedly limited basketball IQ it seems as if Outlaw is, far too often, a very uni-dimensional player. Despite his freakish athletisism he FAR too often settles for the jump shot. He looks great when they're dropping, but when he's cold like he has been the last couple of weeks, he looks downright miserable... And he has simply refused to take advantage of his ability to get to the basket.

Martell, for all his other faults, appears to sincerely be trying to round out his game. He's one of the few people on the offensive side of the court who is ALWAYS moving. Seriously, he may not score consistently yet, but I would HATE to have to guard this guy because he just doesn't stop cutting and setting screens. I really think with added maturity and continued work with Bill Bayno and other coaches, Martell has the IQ to become a pretty consistent 14 PPG type of player, and will probably add 5 boards and a few assists to that as well.

So, that's the long way around saying I think the Blazers' continued insistance on Outlaw being part of the future is really nothing more than an attempt to keep other teams thinking highly of him. Other than Jarrett Jack, I think Travis is the most likely player to be moved this Summer, and I think it would be a good move.

Poll: Jack Trade Rumors

ChrisB803 — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:40:12 -0000

The rumors are heating up. Sources close to Jarrett Jack are saying he expects to be traded before the deadline. No word yet on what kind of deal might be in the works, but there's also rumors that Portland could be looking to move Taurean Green as well.

Speculation time: Odds are, if Portland is looking to clear up the log jam at Point Guard, they're most likely hoping to fill a need. Right now those include perimeter defense, and interior rebounding. Odds are you can't fill both at the same time, so who do you think the Blazers could be targeting?

I know Jack was included in the earlier rumors regarding Danny Granger, but you'd have to believe the price would be a LOT steeper than that in order to land him.

We can speculate, of course, about WHO Portland might be trying to get, but my assumption is that this is more about dumping Jack (an aborted experiment, perhaps) and clearing out space for Sergio to develop, and Roy to continue taking more duties at the point.

Poll

Which of the following would this trade accomplish?

Clear the logjam at Point Guard (develop Sergio)

21 votes

Fill another Need (Defense/Rebounding/Shooting)

17 votes

Both A and B

49 votes

87 votes | Poll has closed

ROY = All-Star X2

ChrisB803 — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:35:36 -0000

OK, here's the scoop everyone: Hate to ruin the suspense, but Roy IS an All-Star reserve.

Book it.

Now the big question is... Will he play in BOTH games?

(And no, there is no link to a source on this one. It comes straight from the higher realms, of which there will be no names and identities are kept secret by use of a paper bag with a giant question mark on the front)

"Rise With Us" - Express Yourself

ChrisB803 — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:43:49 -0000

As some of you may know, my real job is as a reporter for KXL AM (Home of the Blazers, baby), and we're doing a follow up story on the flap around the "Rise With Us" sign. I'd like to hear from the FANS what they think about this. Does it make you mad? Do you agree with the city and its anonymous tipster? Would you rather be fishing?

You can contact me via e-mail at chris.brown@kxl.com, or call the news room at 503-417-7630 and ask for Chris Brown. I'll be here until about noon, and I'd love to hear from you.

Thanks!
~Chris Brown
Newsradio 750 KXL

Defining Discontent

ChrisB803 — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 15:34:08 -0000

I've heard this mentioned in a few places, but maybe it's time to put a finer point on the topic of WHY fans are discontented.

During Portland's first three losses on the road people were worried, but jitters and inexperience could easily be used as excuses for the lapse.

During the four-game home winning streak fans were understandably ecstatic because the team showed outright moxy, poise and a killer instinct. With the cheers of the fans behind them they shocked all of us and showed just how much talent really is waiting to burst forth.

This brings us to the most recent four-game road slide and, I think, the biggest reason for the discontent amongst fans: Effort. Or, more accurately, the complete lack of it.

You can have less talent, be smaller and less experienced, but if you want it more than the other team you're at least going to be competitive. I'm glad to hear Sarge is back a little bit, because this team needs a kick in the butt. I think they've been congratulating themselves far too much on how much work they did in the off-season, forgetting that even MORE effort is required once the season begins.

You can talk about how teams befuddled the Blazers with their full court press, and how our perimeter defense is being exploited by athletic wings and sharp shooters. All of that is true, and it's all stuff that takes time to figure out, but... come on... If a player lacks defensive prowess, fine, but that's not exactly the end of the story. EFFORT, man. Effort. Why do we seem to simply accept that if a player is a sub-par defender that's just the way things are and others need to step up to fill the gap?

Look at Martell. Watch some film of him last year compared to this one. The way he plays defense is light years ahead of where he was a year ago. He's still no Bruce Bowen, but he's no longer a matador with a crimson and black cape, letting the bulls pass by him.

I know defense isn't a sexy part of the game, and most players would rather score 30 points than grab five steals, but defensive stats show effort more than any other.

And for me that's what it comes down to. There were times last year when the team was down big in the last part of the game, but they kept fighting. This year you'd reasonably expect the same, or even more of a fighting spirit, but so far it's been woefully missing, especially after the Philly game.

I'm not saying this is going to continue all year. I fully expect the team to win a game on the road soon. But that's not going to happen until two things take place: First, every player on the team commits to being fearless. They've got to have almost a college team demeanor that looks at adversity as a chance to shock people. Secondly, that energy needs to START at the defensive end. It's amazing how cathartic a few steals leading to fast breaks can be, and how much it can put the other team on its heels.

Sound off now: Which would you rather see, wins or effort? (Not that the two are mutually exclusive)